[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Activism See other Activism Articles Title: Virginia Court Is Pressed To Take Action In SSN Case After the Governor and Trans-portation Secretary of Virginia took a posture of deliberate indifference to a religious accommodation request, they find themselves now subject to a law suit against them in their private capacities. David Alan Carmichael has been trying to get a religious accommo-dation to the Virginia’s requirement to adhere a SSN as an element of his identity in order to apply for a driver’s license. After the Virginia General Assembly enacted a ‘Religious freedom preserved’ statute, much like the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, David renewed his request for religious accommodation directly to Governor Tim Kaine. In his request, David cited a provision of the Virginia Constitution that indicates the ‘buck stops’ at the Governor when a government practice appears to violate the Constitution. The only action taken by Governor Kaine was to pass the ‘buck’ to Transportation Secretary Pierce Homer. Pierce Homer then completely evaded any reference to the freedom of religion provisions in the Virginia Constitution and statutes, even though they were squarely put to him by Carmichael. The request was sent again to the Governor. Carmichael’s correspondence was ignored. A suit was filed by David in the Richmond City Circuit Court on April 28, 2008. In his suit, David claimed that other people are granted driver’s licenses without having to identify themselves with a SSN for reasons other than religion. In his recent motion for injunction, David listed several Federal cases involving religious objections to the uni-versal use of the SSN a personal identifier. Each of the cases that David cited went in favor of the religious objector on the basis of the standard recently enacted by the Virginia General Assembly, Va. Code §57-2.02. Leahy v. District of Columbia, is a driver’s license case parallel to Carmichael’s. The Government lawyers appear to be digging in their heels against David’s request for accommodation of religion. They’ve responded to his suit in boilerplate fashion, making a motion for dismissal rather than answering the Complaint. David has a difficult road ahead. No doubt, it is a road that needs to be paved. Access the case documents at http://www.christianliberty.org/carmichael_dmv
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 7.
#4. To: David Alan Carmichael (#0)
Good luck with it, David.
So far, the Court has not responded to any of my submissions. The latest one was a motion for injunction. It is worth reading. The first four pages are pretty reduntant but the substance of the motion is really good. www.christianliberty.org/...com-injunction- motion.doc
Please keep us posted. Can you motion for a summary judgment due to lack of response? Again, best of luck with it.
There are no replies to Comment # 7. End Trace Mode for Comment # 7.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||